300 Monks

Rating: 4.3/10. From 13 votes.
Please wait...

If you are a composer and/or songwriter, please leave your comments and experiences with 300 Monks. We want to hear the good as well as the bad! Please rate, from 1 to 10, by clicking on one of the stars. Below is some general information but we make no guarantee of accuracy. Check with 300 Monks for all details. Please contact us for any corrections.

URL: http://www.300monks.com/
Accepting Submissions:Yes
Submit Online:Yes
Submit By Mail:Yes
Submissions Reviewed:Yes
Types Accepted:Instrumentals
Charge For Submissions:Yes
Up Front Money:
Royalty Free:
(non-broadcast use)
(Exclusive, Non, Semi)

(Semi = Free to place on own
but not with another library)
Re-Title: No
Set Own Price:No
Contract Length:Unknown
Payment Schedule:Bi-Annual
License Fee Split:
PRO Split Based on 100%:
or writer)
Requires Licensee To File Cue Sheet:Yes
Pays On Blanket License:
YouTube Content ID:
Active Site:Yes
Offers Subscriptions To Clients:

78 Replies to “300 Monks”

  1. Fyi, from there website –
    “Update February 13, 2017 โ€“ we are currently not accepting new submissions as we upgrade our technology platform.”

  2. quote from site

    Music Submission Account Setup and Review
    To reduce the quantity of arbitrary submissions, we have instituted a modest account setup fee.
    After payment, you will be directed to submission form.
    Price: $2.97

      1. You get it back. I got accepted and got it back. This one is fair and a good way to keep out the masses. This is the only site I’ve paid for other than YouLicense (which is also worth it).

  3. I’ve been with them for a few years with only a couple of sales. I didn’t pay any submission fees though. Maybe they have changed their policy.

    Because of the lack of sales I recently asked them to close my account. I’m pulling back from any libraries that aren’t selling for me.

  4. I feel paying to either submit music or paying to have someone represent music isn’t a good way to go unless you are fairly certain of some sales.There are plenty of companies out there who don’t charge and in my opinion do as good a job at shopping your music as those that do!

  5. The only rule I personally have about libraries is If I don’t get paid, they don’t get paid.I will not pay people to take my music.

  6. I thought of submitting but those 20 bucks submission fee , even if it says refundable if accepted ,seem a bit turn off.I understand the reasons but still

  7. I joined them about 3 months ago, I just need to fill out all the tedious info. I don’t think I will any time soon. 2-3 years? I’d rather use that time composing music for a library who actually moves music.

  8. I’m getting a feeling that when potential client contacts them, it is mostly the discretion of the owner to select the composer for them. Also, I did not see the option where if someone likes a certain track and want to hear more of the composer’s catalog, there was no option for it unless I’ve missed something. Any thoughts anyone?

  9. It says up top they don’t take submissions but the website says they do. Thinking about maybe trying and send a link and see what happens.Undecided. I really prefer to submit to places that warrant a comment a little more often than almost never.
    Sure doesn’t seem like anybody here gives them a thumbs up or down for that matter.

  10. I uploaded music several months ago and he has not yet been able to get the music on the site yet. I don’t know what his technical difficulties are but I have given up.

  11. Anyone have any updates on this? Curious if anyone has had any sales at all? Had 50 tracks with them and nothing sold since I uploaded my tracks.

    Just curious if anyone has had any success with them?

    1. I uploaded about 10 tracks to them in September 2009. No sales, and I yanked them in September of this year. Probably took them off prematurely, but in all fairness, I don’t think they were very licensable.

      1. A lot of complaints here and in reference to other non-ex libraries, always seems to be about not selling after a year or 18 months. You guys have to remember that licensing is a real long game, especially with non-ex libraries; they have so much music for clients to choose from and they are one of so many libraries & publishers desperatly trying to have their music licensed. Be patient and if your tracks are good enough you will get licenses; 300 Monks is a good library and unlike many non-exclusives they offer a fair split & always communicate well; the guy who runs it, Andrew seems to be doing an awesome job; in my opinion.

        1. What do you think holds back most composers from being successful in non-exclusive libraries? Is it a lack of patience or a lack of talent?

    1. Or maybe if you upload your complete track in lower quality, it would come in under 2mb, if they like it or you, then you could submit in higher quality or by CD.

  12. Hey Andrew, this is a post I left on your submit form because you only accept 2mb submissions.รขโ‚ฌโ€

    2 MB Really? Listen I don’t mean to be a jerk here. But it would be nice if you guys were a little more musician friendly. We Artists have to spend so much of our time dealing with the idiosyncrasies of every library platform we upload and submit to.
    More than half the time we have to be creating music goes into filling out metadata, checking boxes and dealing with non-uniform standards. It’s a real pain.
    But one thing is for sure, every library out there does not force you to drag your songs into editing software and spend time trying to figure out what parts to cut just so you can submit to one library. It would be really GOOD KARMA for the Monks if they would allow musicians to just upload their mp3s without making their lives anymore tedious than they already are. Can you please just do what every other library out there does and let us upload our submissions without having to spend over an hour doing it? Not just for me, but for every musician that comes after me? That would be greatly appreciated by all of us.

    Sorry if I was a little pissy then, I feel better now but I still think it would be a good Idea to fix that ๐Ÿ™‚

    1. What an excellent point. We are all trying our best to get our music out there and for sure, having to get your music back into the editing software and mess with it is a royal pain.

      On the other hand, the 300 Monks may be trying to conserve space.

      Unfortunately I would not be able to participate in this site because of the 2 Meg limit.

      Hope it works for everyone who submitted.

    2. You only submit up to 3 tracks for the initial screening. Although we’d all prefer a bigger size limit, is this really such a big deal?


      If you are an experienced composer, how long does it take you to run a mixdown of the first 60 seconds of 3 pieces?

      If you can’t impress someone in the first 60 seconds, it’s unlkely your piece will get anywhere regardless. So, if you think you would have to do major edits to squeeze the best parts of a piece into a short mix, your piece pitched in full form wouldn’t pitch well in this business anyway.

      I’m not saying that this submission process is ideal…. But c’mon, it’s certainly not worth getting rattled over. It comes down to whether or not you think this library is a good match for you and your tracks. If it is, the 2mb thing is trivial IMHO,

      1. anonx, its all about the 2mb thing, when i spend half my time submitting instead of making music, no other library that i can think of makes you spend an 20 minutes submitting your music because they want you to edit it first…they should except 128k tracks they way they are

        1. It is their business.They can do what they want to. If you cannot be bothered taking 3 minutes (tops) to edit a track for them ….don’t do it…Simples.
          Lots of people think that the world owes them a living……guess what….It doesn’t

          1. entropik, its not about the world owing you a living it’s about about a music libray not being a pain in the [removed by moderator, no profanity!] to all the people they depend on for THEIR livelyhood…If i was a library I’d think before making everyone edit their tracks before submitting…especially when libraries don’t do that…just good karma for the monks

            1. Libraries want all sorts of things.. Tracks submitted at 44khz 16 bit wav, 44 khz 24 bit wav, 44khz 24 bit aif….etc Directors want even more…. change this bit…that bit. Even when you think it is done they can come back with ‘we have re-edited that scene…can you you shave 3 seconds off that really complicated through composed bit’ ! If you don’t want or can’t be bothered to do what OTHER people want…in this business you will get NOWHERE>

              1. what you’re talking about are necessities, which is all the more reason that they should not pile unnecessary work just for an initial submit…the whole industry would benefit from some submission standards …

                  1. Entropik, it’s not about me, I made the comment because it’s a pain in the [@dhruvaaliman if you continue to use profanity your comments will be deleted ***second warning***] for everyone except you…if it was just about me I wouldn’t bother making the comment at all

                    1. Just in case you didn’t see this: @dhruvaaliman if you continue to use profanity your comments will be deleted.

            2. Maybe it’s the libraries way of weeding out the pain in the rump composers before the composers even submit something in the first place. Squeaky Wheel composers not only pile on ALOT of extra work for libraries, but most times their music doesn’t begin to compensate for their less-than-business-like personalities..

                1. …but if everyone just didn’t submit to them because of that, the monks would change their submission platform real fast. I think composers take for granted that they have to cater to every whim, then call it professionalism. If composers were unified or had a union like SAG is for actors composers would save a lot of time and make more money.

                    1. Brother, you probably been doing this so long you don’t even realize how much time has been shaved off your life dealing with all these non-uniform standards. Look at our counterparts…the actors, they, and I’m one of them, have a unified system, music libraries are like casting directors and they all ask for the same thing- 8″ by 10″ head shot and a 5 minute max reel, and SAG actors get a bump in pay for every little adjustment they have to make…drive to the studio BUMP, smoke in the room BUMP, production serves lunch late BUMP, night shoot BUMP, extra change of clothes BUMP…and that’s just for the background extras.
                      We make background music and because we are not a union on or organized we can’t even get our money till a year later after something airs. It’s ridiculous, and musicians just except it and think they are professional for doing so. Actors get payed within two weeks before anything airs. This industry doles out just enough money to keep musicians from rebelling. Musicians buy into the myth that their time is not valuable as actors, or other union production crew people. We can’t even make money selling music because of file sharing then we have to wait a year for placement money without even knowing if we got a placement until the check comes. The whole system is ridiculous and musicians just bend over and take it. Musicians don’t have a clue how much better it could be if they just got some standards going.

                    2. I have to strongly agree with Entropik here. You sure had a lot of time to type but 3 quick edits take too much time. If loading your tracks into your DAW for trivial edits is too much for you, this really is the wrong line of business to be in.

                1. “You should start your own library conforming to your standards” – oontz

                  Good idea! That’ll be the wave of the future. All composers having their own online libraries. Cut out the middlemen.

                  Maybe I’ll start mine this year. All music will be free for the first six months of operation. After that, I’ll really sock it to them. ๐Ÿ˜€

                  1. I’m with 300 monks. All I did was send already edited 30 second clips. If you don’t already have 15 and 30 sec clips of your material than this is not the library for you. This is primarily an inst library and most libraries like this want you to have multiple versions of your tracks. After being accepted I did place vocal tracks as well.

                    Honestly, telling a library to change their submission requirements is not only feudal but it’s like telling someone at a job interview that you don’t like the questions they’re asking. If they were suffering from their submission policy they would change it. I don’t understand why folks don’t just move on to the next library. That’s what I do when I don’t think I’d be a good fit. Life is too short………make music.

  13. Great thread. side question: It’s in this site somewhere, but can someone recommend a cue sheet format? There are plenty on the web; is there one template that you can use with confidence for all the agencies that require one? I thank you in advance.

  14. If a library does not re-title and collects no back end, you should be able to register your songs yourself with your PRO and collect. That assumes that cue sheets are filled out correctly. If the library has no interest in this you need to keep an eye on that yourself if you can– e.g. IF you find out where your songs were used, check with your PRO.

    1. Great point – with most royalty free websites, you might be able to get the occasional performance royalties, but only if these stars are in alignment:
      1) you have registered the tracks with your PRO i.e. ASCAP/BMI/PRS
      2) somehow the customer has the writer and publisher info for the music you’ve written
      3) they air it on a radio station / TV channel that is surveyed by the PROs
      4) the cue sheet is filled out properly (no spelling mistakes, nothing to get it rejected by the PROs)
      5) the cue sheet is sent to the PROs, and received
      6) the data entry clerk at the PRO enters the information correctly (no spelling mistakes)

      As you can imagine, this is unlikely unless someone is actively chasing it all up, i.e. someone who has a vested interest – you or a publisher

      Hence the value in assigning your publishing to a company that will do the legwork for you

  15. Hi Andrew hope youre well,

    would you be kind enough to clarify wether :-

    a) there are upfront monies on placements from master and sync licences?

    b) if there is no retitling and you guys are taking the publishing share, how do you implement this?



  16. Hi there,

    I founded 300 monks and wanted to clarify some inaccurate information listed here. We DO NOT re-title tracks. As a Composer myself, I do not feel comfortable with this grey area and legal nightmare scenario. If and when a major track gets picked up by say a major film, there could be lots of conflicting claims on the copyright.

    Also, we receive many many submissions daily and usually only reply if we are interested in the artist/music. Sometimes it takes a while to wade through all the stuff. So if you have not received a reply, my deepest apologies, and we will set up an auto-response to give confirmation of receipt.

    thanks for listing us.

    The Head Monk

    1. “If and when a major track gets picked up by say a major film, there could be lots of conflicting claims on the copyright” – Andrew from 300 Monks

      Since the composer holds the copyright with the non-exclusive, re-title libraries, how can there be conflicting claims? I would think there would be more potential conflict by not re-titling.

  17. Took about a year (!!!) to get a response but when I did it was positive and Andrew seems altight. I’ve placed about 14 tracks with them just recently so we’ll see how it goes. For some reason I feel positive about it but I’m not sure why.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.